Greek American Rehab Care Ctr
220 N First Street, Wheeling, IL 60090 · Non profit - Corporation · 188 certified beds · (847) 459-8700 Medicare & Medicaid certified
The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (28% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- it has 2 actual-harm citations
One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.
A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 3 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 3 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 3 of 5 |
| Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital | 3 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 4 to 5 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 19.0% | 13.4% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 4.5% | 6.3% | 5.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 0.0% | 0.9% | 0.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 0.5% | 1.5% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 97.7% | 54.2% | 6.5% | worse than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 2.8% | 3.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 14.7% | 14.3% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 14.8% | 18.3% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 91.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 4.9% | 4.8% | 4.7% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 19.5% | 20.6% | 21.2% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 16.2% | 21.7% | 17.1% | typical |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.5% | 2.2% | 1.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 94.1% | 63.1% | 79.4% | better |
| Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission | 28.1% | 26.1% | 22.6% | worse |
| Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit | 9.1% | 13.9% | 12.0% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 3.43 | 2.02 | 1.67 | worse |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 1.52 | 2.22 | 1.80 | better |
‡ On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital
Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.
52.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 205 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.
Met the expected recovery: 42.0% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 119 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.28 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 43% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 26% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | 52.8%CMS range 45.8–60.5 | 51.5% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | 9.3%CMS range 6.8–12.5 | 10.7% | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | 42.0% | 56.6% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | 44.5% | 52.8% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | 36.1% | 50.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | 99.5% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | 100.0% | 100.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge | 100.0% | 98.7% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | 0.5% | 0.0% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | 1.5% | 1.9% | Oct 2024–Sep 2025 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | 7.6%CMS range 5.6–10.8 | 7.1% | Oct 2023–Sep 2024 | no different from U.S. |
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | 1.13 | 1.02 | Oct 2022–Sep 2024 | CMS makes no comparison for this measure |
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 188 beds and averages 160.2 residents a day — about 85% occupied, or roughly 28 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.
Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.83 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.85 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.50 is at or above the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.
Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 3.53 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.96 on weekdays — 11% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.92 to 0.66 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 28% is below the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.
Inspection deficiencies
State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
10 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Actual harm · G2026-01-16 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure preventive measures were in place to prevent developing of new skin impairment and deterioration of current pressure ulcer, and failed to follow physician orders in wound management. These failures affect one (R144) residents in the sample of 31 reviewed for Pressure Ulcer/Wound Care Management, and resulted in R144 all developing a Stage 3 Sacral Pressure ulcer, with R144's wound needing debridement.Findings include:1.R144 was re-admitted on [DATE], with diagnoses listed in part but not limited to Alzheimer's disease, Dementia, History of falling, Pressure ulcer of sacral region stage 3.Active physician order sheet indicated: Bilateral heel suspension boots for offloading every shift. Low air loss mattress. Use one flat sheet only every shift. Moisture barrier for incontinence care as needed every shift for skin prophylaxis. (specialized) cushion when resident is up in chair to protect skin integrity. Sacrum- clean with normal…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Actual harm · G2023-08-25 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure a resident at risk for falls with a history of falls was supervised in the bathroom. This failure resulted in R1 falling from the toilet and sustaining a right hip fracture requiring surgical intervention. This applies to 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for falls in the sample of 6. The findings include: R1's face sheet shows she is a [AGE] year old female and has diagnoses including: history of falls, unsteadiness on her feet, pain in right hip and a nondisplaced intertrochanteric right femur fracture. R1's 6/2/23 facility assessment shows she has a moderate cognitive impairment and requires staff assistance with toileting and transfers. R1's active fall risk care plan initiated on 12/29/2020 shows she is at high risk for falls and has had falls on the following dates: 12/14/18, 12/17/19, 1/20/20, 4/11/20, 4/29/20, 7/3/20, 2/14/21, 8/15/21, 10/18/21, 11/20/21, 12/25/21, 5/5/22, 11/16/22, 1/8/23, 5/14/23 and 7/7/23. The same care plan shows R1 has…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · F2026-01-16 · tag F0814 — failed to dispose of garbage properly — widespreadDispose of garbage and refuse properly.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow management of waste bins. This deficiency has the potential to affect all 156 residents receiving food from the kitchen. Findings Include:On 1/13/2026 at 9:38 AM during kitchen initial round, one garbage bin with more than half full of refuse was without a lid/cover. Garbage bin was by food preparation area and there was no staff currently working in the vicinity of immediate area. V5 (Food Service Director) stated if there is no staff currently working in the area, garbage bins should have the lid on.On 1/13/2026 at 10:14 AM, V1 (Administrator) stated he is not sure of the policy for garbage bins management in the kitchen. V1 said he is not sure if garbage bin should have a lid when not in use.On 1/14/2026 at 9:35 AM, V2 (Director of Nursing) stated garbage bins should have a lid on when not in use for infection control purposes. Policy and ProcedureSubject: Kitchen Waste Bins - trash cans, Effective date 1/13/2026Policy: It is the policy of the Greek American Rehabilitation and Care Centre to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-16 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — isolatedKeep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assure resident's personal privacy for electronic medical records and during administration of insulin. This deficiency affects two (R85 and R132) of three residents in the sample of 31 reviewed for Resident Privacy.Findings include: 1.On 1/13/26 at 11:41AM, V14, RN/Registered Nurse, administered an insulin injection to R85's abdominal area without providing privacy. The door was widely open visible to residents and employees passing through the hallway. V14 said she should have closed the door to provide privacy to R85 when administering insulin injection to her abdomen.2.On 1/13/26 at 10:19AM, observed a laptop on top of the treatment cart outside the door with the screen exposed, displaying R132's list of physician orders, visible to employees and residents walking past in the hallway. V4, Wound Care Nurse/WCN said she should have closed the computer screen to provide privacy for the confidential records of R132.On 1/13/26 at 2:20PM, V2, DON (Director of Nursing), said they should provide privacy when…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-16 · tag F0644 — isolatedCoordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to refer a resident to the appropriate state-designated authority for a PASSAR (Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review) level 2 screening for evaluation and determination of newly evident serious mental illness related condition and prescribed medication, for one of one resident (R108) reviewed for a PASSAR level 2 screening in a sample of 31.Findings Include.On 1/15/2026 at 10:30am, R108's admission record documented a new Diagnosis, dated 5/12/2025, for Delusional Disorder, and on 12/20/2025 for Major Depressive Disorder, with added medication of Venlafaxine HCI 75 mg one time per day for Depression.On 1/15/2026 at 10:45am, V1 (Administrator) said, I know that residents with a mental illness should have a PASSAR level 2 completed but not if they have dementia. I have social services requesting a PASARR level 2 now for all the resident's that you've requested. On 1/15/2026 at 10:50am, V2(Director of Nursing-DON) said, (R108) should have a PASARR level 2 completed if he has a new psychiatric diagnosis and prescribed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-16 · tag F0645 — isolatedPASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR, Level I and Level II) was conducted prior to admission affecting 2 of 3 residents (R12, R45) reviewed for PASARR in a total sample of 31.Findings Include:Findings include: 1.R12 is an [AGE] year-old female who was admitted into the facility with an initial admission date of 9/20/2021. R12 was diagnosed with a major depressive disorder on 10/15/2021. On 1/15/2026 at 11:00 AM, R12's physician order documented R12 is on Sertraline HCL Tablet 75 mg by mouth at bedtime. On 1/15/2026 at 11:00 AM, surveyor was not able to find PASARR level I screen for R12. On 1/15/2026 at 12:25 PM, V2 (Director of Nursing) said R12's PASARR Level I screen should have been completed. 2.Review of R45's records indicate an initial admission of 5/6/2021. Current diagnoses include schizoaffective disorder (9/23/2023), depressive type, other specified anxiety disorders (5/4/2025), major depressive disorder,…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-16 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolatedProvide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement care plan interventions and follow the recommendation of Occupational Therapy for residents with limited mobility. This affects two (R1 and R124) of three residents in the sample of 31 reviewed for Restorative Program.Findings include:1.R1 was re-admitted on [DATE] with diagnosis listed din part but not limited to Dementia, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Osteoarthritis, Palliative care. Active physician order sheet indicated: reposition resident per turning schedule. Comprehensive care plan indicated she has ADL (Activity of daily living) self-care deficit. Intervention: Provide (specialized wheelchair) and assistance for mobility as needed. She has limited physical mobility due to weakness. Functional abilities and goals dated 12/29/25 indicated she is dependent with ADLs and transfers.On 1/13/26 at 10:57AM, R1 was sliding down in a high back chair in the dining room. R1 was confused, has facial grimacing, and appears uncomfortable.…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-16 · tag F0695 — failed to provide proper breathing / tracheostomy care — isolatedProvide safe and appropriate respiratory care for a resident when needed.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement oxygen equipment storage affecting 1 of 2 (R118) residents reviewed for oxygen administration in a sample of 31. Findings Include:On 1/13/2026 at 11:04 AM, R118's oxygen nasal cannula tubing was on top of the bed, without a visible date, tubing touching the floor, and not currently in use. V21 (Certified Nursing Assistant) said she was not sure if tubing should be stored in a bag when not in use but stated would loop tubing and placed on top of the concentrator. V21 then looped the tubing and placed on top of oxygen concentrator. On 1/13/2026 at 11:24 AM, V10 (Registered Nurse) stated R118 uses her oxygen as needed and when not in used, tubing should be stored in a (plastic) bag for infection control purposes.On 1/14/2026 at 9:35 AM, V2 (Director of Nursing) stated when oxygen is not in used tubing should be stored in a clear plastic bag and tubing should not be touching the floor to prevent cross-contamination. Review of Care Plan Report, revision on 1/13/2026, read Problem: The resident has oxygen…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-16 · tag F0849 — isolatedArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice services.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement its hospice services agreement in provision of information for coordinated hospice care. This deficiency affects one (R87) of three residents in the sample of 31 reviewed for Hospice Care Management.Findings include:On 1/13/26 at 10:49AM, V17, LPN (Licensed Practical Nurse), said R87 is on hospice care. R87 was up in a wheelchair in the dining room.R87 was re-admitted on [DATE], with diagnosis listed in part but not limited to Dementia, Palliative care, Parkinson's disease, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Pressure Ulcer of sacral region stage 3. Active Physician order sheet (POS) indicated admit or eval to hospice (other hospice name) hospice 6/18/25. Active comprehensive care plan indicated R87 has a terminal diagnosis and is presently connected to (hospice name) for hospice care services. She has co-morbid complexities and maybe fatigues and have decreased social interaction with her peers. She is unable to make decisions about her…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2026-01-16 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement appropriate infection prevention and control practices during medication administration. This deficiency affects all three (R49, R50 and R85) residents in the sample of 31 reviewed for Infection control prevention program.Findings include:1.On 1/13/26 at 9:31AM, V10, RN (Registered Nurse), took the portable Blood Pressure (BP) machine from the hallway without disinfecting it and brought to R50's room. V10 placed the BP cuff around R50's left wrist and checked the oxygen saturation on left finger. V10 obtained BP of 107/56mmHg, pulse rate of 69/minute and 90% oxygen saturation in room air. After obtaining her vital signs, she prepared her medications. She did not disinfect the medical equipment used. After she administered medication to R50, she is preparing to take vital signs of another resident without disinfecting the medical equipment.On 1/13/26 at 9:40AM, V10 said they usually disinfect medical equipment used for taking resident's vital signs before and after using it. V10 said she forgot to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| BOUSIS, ELENI | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 06/01/2013 |
| FRANCIS, PAULA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 06/01/2013 |
| HARDUVEL-BOYLE, MARIA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 09/29/2018 |
| KARAHALIOS, PETER | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 06/01/2013 |
| KOPSAFTIS, PETER | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 06/01/2013 |
| LALIOS, NICHOLAS | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 07/01/2017 |
| MANIATIS, DENISE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 10/17/2022 |
| REVELIOTIS, GEORGE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 06/01/2013 |
| ROMAS, JAMES | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 07/01/2017 |
| TZAKIS, THERESA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | since 06/01/2013 |
| GALANIS, TEDDI | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 09/07/2019 |
| KAMPAS, ATHENA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 02/08/2023 |
| LALIOS, EFTHIMIA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 11/01/2024 |
| PAPPAS, GEORGETTE | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 02/21/2022 |
| VARNAVAS, DINO | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 05/21/2018 |
| VERVILOS, MAGDALENA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER | since 08/20/2020 |
| PAPANOS, NICHOLAS | Individual | OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNF | since 02/02/2002 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 22 rows in the source record cover these 17 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
Follow the money — this home’s finances
Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.
This home reported $1.1M paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.
Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2024. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.
Cost & finances
Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.
What families pay in IL
This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Illinois Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 146031. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-01-16, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →
Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →
Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.